Businesses should measure the positive and negative impacts of the tech in practical, testable ways
[SINGAPORE] The article on Jul 24 about workers in Singapore and Hong Kong being less optimistic than their regional peers about the impact of artificial intelligence on jobs noted that 89 per cent of professionals in Singapore use AI at work.
Yet, only 67 per cent believe it will affect their careers positively.
Their concerns include displacement, unfair AI-driven decisions and skills becoming obsolete. However, that gap will not close through general AI training alone.
Employers should pair instruction with supervised workplace trials: mixed-experience teams using approved tools on recurring tasks, with clear human review and protection for workers who flag failures.
The evidence should be practical. Did AI save time without increasing errors or rework? Did it improve customer outcomes? Can employees spot confident but wrong output, bias and privacy risks?
Crucially, are managers redesigning roles transparently, rather than rewarding speed and hiding the cost of correction?
Singapore’s goal of training 100,000 workers is ambitious. Success should not be measured only by course completions or tool use. It should also be measured by whether people can use AI to improve real work, while retaining judgment, accountability and trust.
Workplace evidence turns abstract fear into something employees and leaders can test together. That is how optimism grows: not from reassurance, but from proof.
Dr Gleb Tsipursky Behavioural scientist and author
Decoding Asia newsletter: your guide to navigating Asia in a new global order. Sign up here to get Decoding Asia newsletter. Delivered to your inbox. Free.
Share with us your feedback on BT's products and services